Latest news when it comes to stupidity and television is Miss Naked Beauty. Gok Wan, presenter of ”How to look good naked” (which has it’s own version on Swedish television) will now front a new show in
“the definite search for a natural beauty icon to represent Britain in 2008 and challenge the fake, distorted and plastic images of female beauty bombarding us”.
Now, I know that the some people will argue that this is not too bad, that the representation is so fucked up that we need something else. I could actually agree with this, but on the other hand, there is so many things that I do not agree with. This makes me think that this show is the uttermost sexistic bullshit, far worse that the ones who are at least not trying to have a mission. Those who don’t hide themselves behind nice words and are perfectly upfront with their ignorance. Yes, I am quite a judgmental person, so sue me.
Why do I think like this then? Well, let’s have a think. Who is it that always need to be something else in order to be anyone at all? Who is seen as a doll that is supposed to be dressed up, cut into, take the wrong clothes off and put the right ones on?
Yes, I think you know the answer. Women. And now someone will probably argue that men suffer from this to, and I won’t say no to that. But in this case, comparing industries and possibilities between men and women, it is easy to come to a conclusion about who actually has the power. My reason for being a feminist is not that one sex is better than the other, or that one gender should rule over another. The whole idea about liberating sexes and genders is not to stress that one image is better than the other, that one ideal or expression is preferable. And there we also find a liberating movement for men, men who actually feel that they cannot play the game of the perfect man, with one foot in the quicksand of masculinity and one foot in the trap of “metrosexuality”. Be a man, but not too much, be sensitive, but not to sensitive. How the fuck is anyone supposed to be able to juggle that?
The whole thing can be about being able to choose ideals, to choose expressions, to choose images and, in my oh so humble opinion, also to be represented. Be seen and acknowledged for what you say that you are.
Choose and flip between voices, lust, expressions, ideas, feelings and not have to conform in a very narrowminded way just because you body happen to be shaped in a certain way.
Miss Naked Beauty suggests that clothes and makeup is the sickness, but it is just one of the symptoms that show what we always or just now value the most.
Trends go up and down, following deep structures and reveals many patterns, some of them unexpected, but what they most of all have in common is about excluding.
Who is it then that we actually exclude, make into outlaws? Is it as simple as the look for now states that a certain type of body is in fashion and therefor all other bodies are banned? Not really, there will always be bodies and looks that does not fit into the direct fashion and they will always be more or less accepted. What’s mostly recognizable is that the bodies that are always spit upon are the ones that are to much. To be seen or not is a very mighty thing and when one is very visible because of body, expressions, attitude, voice or other characteristics, there is a certain something that start to click in peoples heads.
I want to explain to you a very swedish expression, that constantly comes up, especially in discussions about feminism, gender and sexuality. Have not come across it yet in the U.K, but please tell me if I may be wrong and point me in the right direction. I suspect there must be something. This expression is closely linked with being to much. The Whore and the Madonna. The idea that a woman is either a Whore or a Madonna, or that she has to be both, but just a Whore in the bedroom and then a Madonna everywhere else. She is judged, weather she is to much of a Madonna, then she is frigid, is she to sexual, then she is the useless and used-up Whore. This twisted thing is very close especially to young teenage women who struggle to find themselves and their own person in a often rough school-environment. They are watched closely, not just by themselves, but by other female and male friends. Early this women and men learn what you are supposed to be, or most important, what you are not supposed to be.
Therefor, the woman who is to outspoken or the man who is preferring to let others speak but himself are seen as very strange. We carry this images with us all our lives, and in the end, the ones who suffer for it, are those who do not fit in. And there is so many of these people. Some of them can “pass”. Acting can be good, learing social skills are even better, but if there is a part of you that want to dress in outrageous outfits, have a different sexual expression (including non at all), make different choices in life and this can’t be done or be acknowledged, then you can feel pretty much fucked, in a very not-pleasing way. Or even worse, meet violence, harassment and other consequences, both from state and society.
Anyhow, the sexual woman is still an issue, because a womans sexuality is not hers, and men, well, honestly. There is not much out there helping you. Either one don’t come or come to fast, or can’t find the right places, and there is so many new things to try out, you better do all of that, otherwise he or she will get bored. And btw, she is not enjoying herself to much is she? Liking the dildo more than her partner? Be afraid, be very afraid! And then the women and the men who could not care less about the opposite gender or any gender at all?!
In the same way as this is an issue, the woman who chooses her own expression and do not give a monkeys about the rules and regulations is also judged.
I don’t want the picture of the “bad” or “good” woman, don’t want to see more things about how you should dress in order to fulfill the idea about how one body is best if it conforms to these shapes. Lots of makeup is apparently really bad, aswell as to revealing clothes. I’m sitting with the an article that sparked a bit of anger infront of me, and I’m looking at the pictures illustrating what is natural and what is not. The picture of the “sexed-up” women is with loads of makeup, big hair, expressive poses and revealing clothes. What get’s me then is the next picture where they are supposed to be natural. Natural is a crap word, cause they are almost as fixed as the other pictures, the only difference is that the props are not the same. I can’t see individuals anymore, can’t see an expression, they are still standing there, but with less attitude, less power, covering their breats and with their backs hunched. Comparing that to what would be the implicated “wrong” looks of the other pictures, they seem to be even more passive, perfect, fragile women. Not human beings, but women firstly. The extremes of the looks of the other photo is also for me quite triggering, they look directly at me with a lot more chutzpah. Chutzpah that could probably make some people uneasy, because of just that.
I’m not saying that either of these roles are the better,and don’t think it’s up to anyone to do this. But there it is again, the created and modified natural beauty against the created and modified “easy” or “sexed up” or “distorted” Which fucking picture is it that really is distorted?